I want to start by saying thank you to you and all of our legislators that have been attending public forums. It is always good to be able to share our concerns with you and as chair of the House Education Committee this year, we especially appreciate the opportunity to let you know how we’re feeling about education in our state.

I am not an educator, but I am a graduate of public school. I am the mother of a university student that graduated from public school and of a 7th grader in public school. I live in a community where our public schools contribute greatly to our quality of life. I am what I hope will be a lifelong resident of Iowa. And I care about Iowa’s future. If even just one of those criteria applied to me it would mean what happens to our public education system affects me and my family.

I watched the House debate education funding recently, and it raised a few concerns for me on what we’re really looking at when we try to evaluate our public schools and determine how to best support them. It is easy to look at the numbers for the state as a whole, to look at our rankings and think that tells us how we are doing with education in our state, but there is a problem with only looking at averages and rank: We tend to miss important information that the full data is trying to tell us.

Big picture. Not the whole story.

You started your closing remarks on the education funding bill by saying that Republicans had never cut education since becoming the majority in the House. At first glimpse this appears as though it could be true, depending on exactly what you are referring to. If by not cutting education you mean you haven’t lowered the supplemental state aid rate, that is technically true. But there have been years where funding was not increased, even though costs for educating Iowa’s students did increase, and years where the growth in funding has been so small as to have been negligible to our schools. It’s easy to use percentages and total numbers to make this sound better than it is. (My mother used to send me to the store with a dollar to buy a gallon of milk. If I gave my daughter $1.50 to get milk for me now, that would be an impressive 50% increase in our milk budget, but she’s still not coming home with a gallon of milk.) If we only look at funding levels but don’t acknowledge increases in educational costs, we’re seeing the big picture, but not the whole story.

After years of under-funding, just “not cutting” education isn’t going to be enough. If our goal is to start moving Iowa back up the ranks of educational quality we are going to have to be willing to make the investment required.

You also said we haven’t had massive teacher layoffs, that the number of teachers has risen every year, and that’s almost true. In 2014/15 there were 34,725 full time teachers in Iowa. In 2015/16 that number rose to 34,727 full time teachers. Yes. 2 more teachers. In that same time frame? Iowa went from a total of 480,722 students in public schools to 483,451 students in public schools. That’s 2 additional full time teachers to handle 2,729 additional students. (In 2009 there were 474,227 students in Iowa’s public schools and 34,643 full time teachers. So in 7 years we gained 9,224 students but only 84 full time teachers.) To look at the total number of teachers in the state’s public schools as a whole number and claim there have been no layoffs is a bit disingenuous. We may have had a net gain of 2 teachers, but that only means that some districts were able to hire additional teachers, it does not mean other districts were not forced to eliminate teaching positions. At best, it would mean all districts were able to maintain their level of teaching staff, but that isn’t likely the case. I’m sure many superintendents and school boards would be willing to clarify that for us, and many have been trying. It is equally important to note that the numbers we are dealing with here address only the issue of full time teachers. The numbers available from the state do not address the part-time teachers so many rural and smaller districts rely on nor does this statistic address the employment levels of para educators and support staff that are just as crucial to our educational system.

Again, big picture, not the whole story.

In the same time period, (2014-2016) the number of superintendents dropped by 4, the number of principals dropped by 11, we lost 28 media/library specialists and 8 positions at our AEAs.

You also addressed class sizes, saying they remained steady or are even increasing in some classes and that’s true. They are increasing and that’s not a good thing. In 2015/16 the average class size for Kindergarten through 3rd grade is 20.775 In 2014/15 that average was 20.725. That doesn’t seem like much of a change, but again, it won’t if we are looking at statewide average. There are districts with falling enrollment numbers that have smaller class sizes and pull the average down. There are also districts facing record enrollment growth that are challenged by tight budgets and can have upwards of 30 to 34 students in a classroom. To truly understand the current issues being experienced due to growing class sizes we would need to look at the actual data from every district. While the change in class sizes between 2014/15 and 2015/16 is small it does continue the gradual upward trend we’ve seen since the mid-2000s. (In 2009, enrollment jumped 7.7% but average class sizes for Kindergarten through 3rd grade that year still dropped to 19.95. Looking beyond statewide averages, the smallest ten districts had class sizes of 8.7 and the largest ten districts averaged 21.5 that year.) Averages do not tell the whole story. In fact, during the last 16 years, none of those grade levels were able to reduce their average size to the state goal of 17 students per classroom. (Only third grade saw a reduction at .4%, K, 1st, and 2nd grades saw increases of 1.2% to 2.5% in that 16 year time period.)

You talked about rankings. You covered some additional information on your website, though not on the floor of the House, so I’ll share those numbers here for anyone who may not have seen them.

You touted teacher salary levels and their rise in rank: Iowa has been pretty stuck in the middle on that one, popping back and forth between 25th and 26th before finally bumping up to 23rd in 2015/16. Even in the tough budget year 2009/10 we still managed to rank 26th.

You shared about our rank for state expenditures per pupil: Our 2015/16 ranking there is 27th, up from 28th in 2014/15 and you’re right, we were at 35 when Republicans gained the majority in the House. And the year after that. And the year after that. And 34th the year after that. It took five years to see any significant change in our rankings on spending.

The fact that we moved that much on expenditures per pupil while not actually raising the amount we spend by any large percentage shows us the danger with relying on rankings for assessments. As with our rank change on teacher salaries, we don’t know if Iowa moved up in the rankings because we did so much better or if it was because the states around us moved down in ranking. It is most likely a combination of both causes but without seeing all the data, we’re seeing the big picture, not the whole story. Rankings alone don’t really tell us much.

Yes, graduation rates rose again, making us the first state in the nation above the 90% level, but at the same time the number of students planning on pursuing any type of post secondary education or training is trending downward.

You pointed out that schools are providing proof of tackling difficult problems. I absolutely agree. You say you own that. With that I simply cannot agree. The continued success of Iowa’s schools in spite of being chronically under-funded, expected to do more with less, and struggling to follow all state mandates, even those that are un-funded, is due solely to the passion, dedication, and sacrifice made by Iowa’s education professionals. NOT Iowa’s politicians. Finding a way to make it work, pushing to do what’s best for their students, even with limited resources and in less than ideal learning environments is what they do every day. That does not vindicate the lack of support and proper funding that has gone on for too many years. Instead I think that tells us that if given proper resources, Iowa could do even more amazing things in our schools. (And perhaps begin the process of once again being known as the education state.)

For years we’ve heard that money is tight. We’ve heard that we should think of the state’s budget like a household budget. And we’ve heard how our need to be cautious is the fault of Governor Culver and the state’s 2009 across the board cuts. Representative Rogers, I’ll tell you what I’ve taught my children. When you first identify the root cause of a problem, I’ll let you pass responsibility to that cause, but if years go by and you have done nothing to correct that problem? Then the responsibility is yours alone.

As for thinking like a household budget, while I disagree that a state’s budget can be that simplistic I will, for the sake of discussion, make that comparison. In our household, like many, we look at our budget from two angles. First, for the immediate budgeting, we look at what we have as income and budget our expenses to not exceed that amount. Second, for more long term budgeting, we look at what our actual needs are, and if that exceeds our current income, then we start looking for ways to increase our income so that those budget needs can be met. This is especially true if the need is something for our children. Like many parents, we are willing to make sacrifices and do a little extra work if it means we can provide things our children need. We need you as legislators to do the same. ​For years public schools have been demonized as greedy, money hungry, wasting state taxpayer dollars on bad teachers that expect to be paid exorbitant amounts. I’ve heard your party admonish them to “do better” at controlling costs and learn to do more with less. I guarantee you, Representative Rogers, that not a single district telling you they need more funding is asking for that money for frivolous things. They aren’t asking for extra. At this point they aren’t even asking for “sufficient”. What they are asking for, is “enough” money. Just what is necessary to hire the number of teachers they need to actually offer all the classes their students should be taking, to properly equip lab spaces so kids can do more hands on learning and less watching other people do experiments in videos, and more textbooks, so students have up to date information in books they don’t have to share with their neighbor and can take home with them to study.

I didn’t get a chance to ask my questions at our most recent forum.I hope you’ll be able to answer these for us, so all of your constituents know where you stand on these education issues.

What specific funding regulations are being looked at for change? Which rules will be made more flexible to free up existing funding for our public schools and how soon can we expect these changes to be implemented?

2. What specific steps are being taken by the Republicans in the statehouse to increase Iowa’s overall revenue. (Not just “big picture” economic development ideas. Specifics.)

3. In many of your speeches and legislative updates we’ve heard you mention that you support teachers and you care about education. What I have not personally heard from you is that you support PUBLIC education or PUBLIC school teachers. Will you go on record in expressing your support for public schools and teachers in Iowa?

I grew up in Iowa at a time when we were well known and celebrated for our excellence in education. I am proud to be a graduate of Iowa’s public schools. I want my children to be able to say the same. Our public schools do the best they can every day to meet the diverse needs of each of their students with the limited resources we’ve provided them. They do this by looking at the whole story. The whole story of each of their buildings, grade levels, classes, and students.

House Republicans continued refusal to bring either education funding bill out of committee means the legislature has now been in violation of state law for more than 40 days. The law that was passed to prevent party politics from holding our children’s education hostage to the process, as it is now. The Senate has passed a 6% increase in this funding for the 2015/2016 school year. An increase that would still leave us below the national average for school funding. The House proposal at this time is 0%, with the majority party stating their preference and intention to not set the growth amount at all until next year. Instead of 14 months to plan a budget, administrators and school boards would have 6-12 weeks. Republicans have repeatedly stated that they do not want to set the Supplemental State Aid rate a year in advance because they don’t know what future revenues will be. Yet that is exactly what they are asking schools to do, with much more disastrous consequences. As we speak, districts are in the process of setting budgets that must be submitted by April 15th, a deadline they do not have the luxury of ignoring. We’ve talked before about the consequences of not knowing funding levels and having to set budgets at the last minute. (Not able to hire the teachers, para educators, and staff they need. Holding off on purchasing new curriculum or implementing new programs, even those mandated by state ed reform. Increased class sizes, fewer resources for students in need, and difficulty or even inability to fully meet the needs of every student.) Now that we are getting closer to the April 15th deadline we are seeing that some districts are facing even more dire consequences. Not just holding off on new programs and implementation of reform initiatives, but having to find ways to make large cuts in their budgets. The Mason City School Board is looking for ways to cut $2 million, Iowa City will be cutting 35 teaching positions, 1 administrative position and an overall budget cut of nearly $3.6 million. West Des Moines will need to cut $2.7 million from their budget and has proposed closing 1 of their elementary schools to help meet that need. The Davenport School Board is looking for nearly $3.2 million to cut, Clinton Schools $900 thousand, Marion Schools $900 thousand, Red Oak Schools $800 thousand this year with a total of $1 million in cuts over the next 2 years. The Johnston School District needs to cut $1.1 million. A superintendent in Northern Iowa has gone so far as to retire so that his district could save money by sharing the superintendent position with a neighboring school. Type the words "Iowa school board budget cuts" into any search engine and you'll soon see that these are just a few districts facing such difficult decisions.

More than half a million kids rely on the state of Iowa for their education and their needs are not being made a priority. This is exactly the situation the education funding law was intended to prevent.

A strong education system is vital for a strong state. It is time to do more than pay lip service to education in Iowa. We need all our legislators to be advocates for our children and their schools, advocates that will follow through in Des Moines with the promises they make in campaigns and public forums. Our students deserve no less, our state deserves no less.

So with the deadline to set school funding more than 40 days past, we have to ask our Governor and House Republicans: Will you stop playing political games with our children’s future, and obey the law? Do what's right for the students of Iowa, set Supplemental State Aid now.Join us in holding our elected representatives accountable. Sign our petition and help us by contacting key legislators.

Iowa Code 257.8 requires the legislature to set the supplemental state aid rate, the amount of state money given to schools, (and formerly known as allowable growth) within 30 days of the release of the Governor's budget. That means the bill confirming the amount set for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2014 and setting the amount for the fiscal year beginning July 1st, 2015 should have been approved, again, according to Iowa law, by February 13th this year.

School districts are required to submit their budgets by April 15th and do not have the luxury of allowing that deadline to pass. Failure of the legislature to set the supplemental state aid rate in a reasonable amount of time means school administrators and school boards are attempting to plan for the future with no clear idea what funds they will receive. Unknowns in their budget put school districts in a very difficult position. Decisions on staffing levels, negotiations on contracts, even decisions on curriculum and class offerings are just some of what is affected when administrators don't know what their overall funding will be. The Senate has passed a 6% increase for fiscal year 2016 . (SF 2077/2079) The House has not brought either bill out of committee. On Wednesday, March 12, (almost a full month after the legally mandated deadline) Rep. Sharon Steckman, (D) Mason City, asked to bring SF2079 out of committee and onto the floor for debate, but the motion was defeated, 53-46.(To see how each Representative voted on the motion, click here for Wednesday's House Journal.)

Unfortunately, this is not the first year the legislature has failed to meet the deadline for school funding. At UNIfy for Education, we believe it should be the last. Doing what is best for the students of Iowa means providing adequate funding, resources, and support, and doing so in a timely manner.

Contact Governor Branstad, Lt. Governor Reynolds, members of the House education committee, and your local Representative. (You can find contact information on our website, here.)

Tell them education in Iowa must be a true priority.

Ask them to set supplemental state aid now.

Many legislators also participate in local forums throughout the session which can be a great way to find out their stance on important issues as well as an opportunity to ask questions and express your views. If you are in the Waterloo/Cedar Falls area, please consider joining us at the Black Hawk-Bremer League of Women Voters Forum this Saturday morning from 10 - noon at AEA 267, 3712 Cedar Heights Drive. All Black Hawk County legislators have been invited to participate and the topic for this forum is state budget.

It takes a village to raise a child, and it takes mutual respect and two-way communication of ideas to make a village prosper. Families, schools and business sectors all have a symbiotic relationship when it comes to preparing our children for the future, and it is vital that they share ideas, and work together as equals to achieve this most vital goal. At local, state and national levels, our school policies are in need of improvements. To bring about meaningful change in education, business leaders need to engage parents and educators, as much as politicians and administrators. A good faith effort in doing so starts with recognizing the harm in the data-driven mentality and micromanagement of teachers. Educators are trained professionals whose role in society has been reduced to glorified babysitters, due in great part to the ed-tech industry's influence on education policy. Trained teachers make a living finding effective ways to inspire students, and helping them understand concepts. They know better than anyone how best to do that, and they should be trusted to do their jobs based on what their experiences have shown to be best practices. Right now, they are on tight leashes, being forced to adhere to scripted lessons and restrictive timelines, yet are the first to be punished when students underachieve.

When discussing student achievement and school policy, in these turbulent times, socioeconomics and student home life must be duly considered. There are students who work 30 hours a week to help the family make ends meet. There are students dealing with issues like depression or substance abuse, or have family members who are. Please understand that no matter how great a teacher is, there are some factors that affect student performance/preparedness to learn that are completely outside of his or her control.

Technology's limitations need to be understood as well as its benefits. For one, it will never replace the loving guidance of a highly-trained, human teacher, who sometimes, is the most stable adult in a student's life. It also means that an iPad that can help students write papers, can also be a distraction from classroom instruction, or less useful if there is a bug in the update, or the wi-fi goes down.

Shiny new facilities are nice, but they, alone, don't increase student achievement. Preparing students to be successful, well-rounded, hirable individuals starts with proven, research-based teaching techniques, not the untested, unproven gimmick du jour. When imposed on them by the districts, educators should be able to tweak those gimmicks that are not working for their students, or replace them with techniques that do. They should also be encouraged to collaborate. Team teaching two different subjects together, like math and science or English and history, can really help students make connections - showing the interconnectedness of the whole curriculum.

Education policy has been reduced to kill and drill activities, test prep, and testing, leaving precious little time for project-based activities and hands-on learning. It is also killing the students' love of learning. The education industry has exploded in recent years, with companies in the technology, textbook, and testing businesses making a killing off taxpayers. Every few years, they push through new gimmicks in order to sell more products, even if education experts and researchers disagree on the content to be taught, its presentation and assessment.

Timed, fill-in-the-bubble, high-stakes standardized tests and the prep for them take up way too much valuable learning time. Despite the claims, they will never reveal any meaningful data about student potential, other than how well students can guess what answer the testers are looking for on very vague questions. Good critical thinkers can read a question, see the potential in more than one of the options, and are left guessing as to what the tester meant. These tests do not allow for clarification of questions, nor for students to explain their answers. The fact that these tests are timed and used to label students and determine their future learning opportunities can trigger anxiety, and adversely affect an otherwise strong student's performance.

There needs to be a push for alternative assessments like portfolios, that paint a more comprehensive picture of a student's achievements and potential. The narrowing of curriculum in order to prepare for standardized tests has gotten to the point where anything that cannot be assessed by a fill-in-the-bubble test is not being taught - including many of what is commonly referred to as "21st century skills". Kids need to learn adaptability to ever-changing environments, and the ability to learn on the fly.

At one time, there was a school in the community who did incorporate "Leader in Me" into their whole K-12 culture, and were able to demonstrate its benefits and effectiveness in kids of all ages. The students in the program, indeed, emerged as strong leaders and critical thinkers. I hope, as more schools adopt The Leader in Me (or similar 21st century skills programs) into their curricula, that local business leaders and the community show better support for them than they did for the school that showed just how well that program works.

It is wonderful that we have local business leaders taking an interest in our students' education. In this political climate, the voices of the educators and parents are all too often ignored. By listening to those of us in the trenches, and using your influence to help bring about much needed, meaningful change, you should see not only long-term gains in employable job candidates, but even more importantly, brighter futures for all students. As students in the Leader in Me program are learning, if we "Begin With the End in Mind" we can create a truly "Win-Win" situation.

]]>Wed, 13 Mar 2013 06:09:48 GMThttp://unifyforeducation.weebly.com/blog/march-2013-legislative-roundupBy UNIfyThe 85th General Assembly of the Iowa Legislature is well underway and education issues are again receiving a lot of attention. After failing to set allowable growth last year, both the House and the Senate are under pressure to set it now for the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 school years, while administrators struggle to adjust their budgets for the unknown.

The education bill, now in the Senate, was passed out of the House with allowable growth, or supplemental state aid, as it will now be known, set at 2 percent for each of the next two years. The Senate version sets allowable growth/supplemental state aid at 4 percent for both years. Read more about the Senate’s version of the bill.

IBOR Oversight and Transparency BillsWe are excited to see two bills introduced that would create greater oversight and transparency at the Iowa Board of Regents. Senator Jeff Danielson introduced Senate File 407, also known as the Iowa Board of Regents Accountability and Transparency Act.The bill not only establishes a public comment period at each meeting, but requires public forums in all areas of the state, restricts board members from having financial relationships with the institutions they govern, requires at least two public readings for anything that will cost more than $100,000, and requires that all votes be done at in-person meetings, not telephonically.

Representative Anesa Kajtazovich introduced a companion bill in the Iowa House. While Representative Kajtazovich’s bill did not make it out of committee before the end of funnel week, Senator Danielson’s bill was voted on by the State Government Committee and passed. The next step will be to get it to the full Senate for a vote and then hopefully, on to the House.

Speak Up in Support of Senate File 407Now is the most important time for us to speak up and make sure our voices are heard.To start, please go sign our petition. As you know, UNIfy has been pushing for greater transparency and accessibility at the Iowa Board of Regents since our beginning. We believe this is a non-partisan issue and just plain good government policy that is long overdue.

Once you sign the petition, start contacting the Governor’s office and legislators in both the House and Senate and let them know you’d like to see them support this legislation. Call, write and email. Encourage your friends to do the same.

Here are some tips to help make your calls:

Be respectful. Address the Governor and Legislators by their title and be sure to thank them for their service.

Be polite. This is about asking for good government. This is not about pointing out issues the board or any specific member has had, this is about doing better moving forward.

Leave a message. You may not be able to get through by phone on your first try. By all means, keep trying, but when they ask if you’d like to leave a message, say yes! You can be certain they keep track of how many calls they receive on each issue. Many calls on the same issue will help them realize that this is important to Iowans.

Address each email/letter individually and personally. This lets them know that you are appealing to them directly, not just sending a form letter.

Tell them why you think this is important. (You want greater transparency at the Regents institutions, you feel a public comment period is a vital part of keeping the public trust, etc.).

Spread the Word Around IowaIf you have friends or family around the state, share our newsletter (or blog, or website) with them and ask if they will help contact their legislators. This issue affects everyone, not just those in Iowa City, Cedar Falls, and Ames. The Board of Regents spends more than $4.9 billion dollars annually. They should have more transparency and involvement with the public so we can all have a say in how that money is used.

Join our mailing listDo you already receive our newsletter? If not, consider signing up to be on our mailing list and you'll receive updates from us right in your inbox. ]]>Fri, 06 Jul 2012 01:32:36 GMThttp://unifyforeducation.weebly.com/blog/top-10-economic-reasons-for-cedar-valley-residents-to-unify-for-education

By Mariah AndrewsThe recent cuts at UNI to academic programs, the university museum and Iowa’s Research & Development School will have a far-reaching economic ripple affect in the Cedar Valley. What kind of economic impact will losing faculty members and students have? What impact will losing families in the College Hill Overlay district have? What impact will this have on the reputation of UNI and our community as a whole?

Here are the top 10 economic reasons to UNIfy for Education.

Prevent losses in business for area retailers (such as Hy-Vee, Target, downtown and College Hill retailers).

Prevent losses in the real estate market, particularly in the College Hill area.

Prevent losses in business for area service industries (restaurants, pubs, plumbers, fuel stations, construction and remodeling companies, etc.)

Prevent losses in the rental housing market, particularly in the College Hill area.

Prevent losses in a labor force with higher education degrees.

Prevent the inability to attract new businesses who depend on an educated workforce.

Prevent losses in part-time student workers.

Prevent losses of education faculty who participate in volunteer and fundraising activities outside of work.

Prevent losses of grants and contracts brought into UNI by education faculty.

Prevent the inability to attract new faculty talent to UNI.

Prevent the inability to attract new workers/families into the community.

By Mariah AndrewsGovernor Terry Branstad himself has said, "I take some of the blame for Iowa’s slide in the rankings – for not realizing sooner that sticking with the status quo would eventually put Iowa at a disadvantage."

Unfortunately, as Education Iowa’s 2011 Annual Condition of Education Report indicates, our performance has continued to slip or stay stagnate in multiple areas.

Here are the eight performance benchmark reasons to UNIfy for Education:

Only 39.4 percent of the graduating class of 2011 reported taking a high-level mathematics course.

While two-thirds (65.7 percent) of the class of 2011 reported taking chemistry, only 26.5 percent took physics.

The fourth-grade ITBS results in reading and mathematics proficiency percentages from 2004-06 to 2009-11 biennium are relatively flat.

The eighth-grade ITBS proficiency results in mathematics and reading is slightly up between the 2004-06 and 2009-11 biennium.

The eleventh-grade ITED proficiency percentage results are mixed, with reading trends slightly up and mathematics results slightly down between the 2004-06 and 2009-11 biennium.

Iowa fourth- and eighth-grade NAEP results in mathematics and reading are also similar from the prior years, with no significant gains in either content area or grade level.

The four-year cohort graduation rate for the class of 2010 was abysmally low -- just 88.8 percent.

Since 2001, the percentage of Iowa students taking the ACT has decreased from 67 percent (2001) to 61 percent (2011). During this same period, the national percentage of students taking the ACT has increased from 38 percent (2001) to 49 percent (2011).

Thanks to my high school I was able to accrue a significant amount of college credit for free through my school (BCLUW in Conrad). Despite hating going to a small school, they really helped me out there and in other aspects of my education. The reason this was so helpful is that I am now graduating this May after three short years of college, eliminating a pretty hefty chunk of student debt I would otherwise have.

I didn’t want to graduate in three years. No way. Giving up that whole year of winter break and spring break, homecoming, and let’s not forget afternoon naps, was not something I was ready to let go of. But when facing an extra $14,000 or so in debt if I stayed for another year, letting go of that last year started to look much better.

So when this petition came across my email, I was pretty excited to see what it was all about and quickly signed up. The petition was made to support H.R. 4170, The Student Loan Forgiveness Act of 2012 introduced by Michigan Representative Hansen Clarke. It is “legislation designed to lend a helping hand to those struggling under massive amounts of student loan debt.”

Student loan debt is a financial crisis and the creator of the petition, Robert Applebaum, explains the reason why:

“As a result of more than 30 years of treating higher education as an individual commodity, rather than a public good and an investment in our collective future, those buried under the weight of their student loan debt are not buying homes or cars, not starting businesses or families, and they're not investing, inventing, innovating or otherwise engaged in any of the economically stimulative activities that we need all Americans to be engaged in if we're ever to dig ourselves out of the giant hole created by the greed of those at the very top.”

I don’t know that it could be said any better. When I went through the process of getting financial aid for my education, I was so confused I almost felt like they were purposely trying to keep me partly in the dark. I’m sure they weren’t, or rather I hope not, but it’s such a frustrating process. And I again was lucky in this process, having a father who worked at bank to help me through the process.

The bill specifically addresses federal loans and does not include private loans. This act would relieve the minds of so many people struggling to pay their debt. I know people trying their hardest, and paying as much as they can monthly to diminish their debt, but federal collectors still think it’s not enough. Despite paying as much as or more than they really can per month, they are still asked for more.

This new bill would help that problem. The goal of the act is to make loan repayment “both simple and fair.” The bill would:

Create a new “10-10 standard” for student loan forgiveness.

If you make payments equal to 10% of your discretionary income for 10 years, your remaining federal student loan debt would be forgiven.

If you have already been making payments on your student loans, your repayment period would likely be shorter than 10 years. The amount you have already paid on your student loans over the past decade would be credited toward meeting the requirement for forgiveness.

Ensure low interest rates on federal student loans by capping them at 3.4%.

Allow existing borrowers whose educational loan debt exceeds their income to break free from the crushing interest rates of private loans by converting their private loan debt into federal Direct Loans, then enrolling their new federal loans into the 10/10 program.

Reward graduates for entering public service professions like teaching and firefighting. It would also provide incentives for medical professionals to work in under-served communities. It would reduce the Public Service Loan Forgiveness requirement to 5 years from its current 10 years.

Student debt slated to skyrocket to one trillion.The petition explains that total American student loan debt is anticipated to exceed one trillon dollars this year. That is a lot of zeros. And because of budget cuts tuition just keeps increasing. I have often asked myself “what exactly is my tuition paying for?” because the price for education – something that not everyone does, something that I didn’t do because my family wanted me to or because my family could pay for it, but because I WANTED to learn and to advance my knowledge and skills – seems ridiculous.

By Katelin TiernanI’m graduating in May from UNI and have been surrounded by the uproar over the many academic cuts being made at the university. But to me, the concern isn’t over this single university in the state, or over these individual programs being eliminated, but my biggest concern is for the state of education in Iowa. I just have to wonder what’s happened, what has broken, that our government is so neglecting one of the most important and foundational things of our state?

It’s not just education, certainly, but other important things like health programs. These programs are all being swept to the side as “unimportant.” But they are not. Education, especially, cannot be looked at second, as something that doesn’t need much support.

I love Iowa, I really do. I don’t know if that is a common feeling among my peers, especially lately. A lot of people my age want to get out of this state as soon as they can. But not me. Until recently I had no doubts I would stay here pretty much my whole life; that I would have a career, getting married, and have a family all in Iowa. Now though, I’m not sure. It pains me to see a state I love throwing away the things we once held so dear.

I’m not alone, I’m sure. A fair deal of students at UNI alone want to transfer, and for many that means leaving the state entirely. Looking toward my own future I don’t think I could stay forever in a state that doesn’t value what I do, with a government in place that doesn’t value what it’s citizens do.

It all starts with education. Something we used to be able to look to in Iowa with absolute pride. We must get back to that point. That’s not going to happen by lowering budgets. That’s not going to happen by completely reforming education programs in a way that a majority of teachers don’t approve of. That’s not going to happen by Iowa citizens remaining silent.

My fellow students on campus have certainly taken notice of the changes occurring around them. Many have been vocal about their objections, but far too many focused only on the issue of closing Price Lab and the education program changes. That’s certainly a worthwhile issue, but it’s just one crack in a broken window. We have to come together, unify now, to get our state, and our education back, before the window shatters completely.